netdev - Re: [patch dpll-rfc 0/7] dpll: initial patchset extension by mlx5 implementation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <64e444ee-70e4-e51a-250d-471cfffeab5a@linux.dev>
Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:36:13 +0100
From:   Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com, vadfed@...a.com
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, jonathan.lemon@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
        poros@...hat.com, mschmidt@...hat.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch dpll-rfc 0/7] dpll: initial patchset extension by mlx5
 implementation

On 26/03/2023 18:00, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
> 
> Hi.
> 
> This is extending your patchset. Basically, I do this on top of the
> changes I pointed out during review. For example patch #6 is exposing
> pin handle which is going to change, etc (there, I put a note).
> 
> First 5 patches are just needed dependencies and you can squash them
> into your patch/patches. Last two patches should go in separatelly.
> 
> Please note that the patch #6 is replacing the need to pass the rclk
> device during pin registration by putting a link between netdev and dpll
> pin.
> 
> Please merge this into your dpll patchset and include it in the next
> RFC. Thanks!
>

Hi Jiri!

Thanks for the patch set. It looks like it covers some changes that I 
have also done to address the comments. I'll try to combine everything 
in a couple of days and will re-spin series and we restart review 
process. I think that there are open question still in the conversation 
which were not answered.

Best,
Vadim